Dr. White couldn't be more right. But his warning that these ratings are only useful when "they are credible, transparent and timely" should serve as a powerful broadside to the current state of ESG disclosure, which is patently everything but credible (self-reported, un-validated data), transparent (non-public results and scoring methodologies) or timely (annual, at best). Here's the highlights from Dr. White's important piece on sustainability rating, rankings and indexes.

Pervasive

50,000 companies annually subjected to ESG evaluations by more than 80 research and ratings organizations worldwide.

400 products offered by the global corporate ratings industry.

The large and growing number of companies subject to some type of ESG evaluation reflects the rapid pace of innovation and acceptance in sustainability credentialing. The bloated number of ratings products signals an absence of generally accepted standards that are comparable to those governing corporate financial and sustainability reporting.

Persistent

Communications technology, big data and globalized markets make ratings a ubiquitous feature of international commerce. Investors, tenants, and consumers live in this always-on information environment. Dyanamic ratings, like LEED's Dynamic Plaque, seek to fill to holes in previous "set and forget" ratings that, upon further examination, didn't live up to their loft goals (or claims). One annual report card is no longer sufficient to effectively communicate sustainability efforts and current performance to stakeholders.

Powerful

Sustainability ratings are an indispensable tool for business-to-business and business-to-consumer exchanges.

Ratings serve as a powerful efficiency enhancer but only when certain conditions are met. Specifically, they must be: credible, transparent, timely.

Rating, Ranking and Indexing... So What?

They inform capital providers with critical information to distinguish firms that outperform their peers in terms of risk management and corporate governance.

Good ratings should, in theory, highlight good management by identifying companies that exhibit management acumen, resiliency in the face of regulatory uncertainty about carbon, and other ESG risks.

Positive Externalities

ESG leaders can expect to be rewarded with lower-cost of capital, an especially attractive advantage for firms that frequently use bonds to finance factory, infrastructure and equipment purchases.

The growing body of research linking strong sustainability performance with strong financial performance only improves the value proposition for sustainable business practices. - Dr. Allen White

Rapid growth of ESG-based investing, now estimated at $21 trillion of ESG assets under management worldwide.

Strong financial performance only improves the value proposition for sustainable business practices.

A study of 2,300 companies by George Serafeim and his colleagues at Harvard Business School, for example, found that companies with good performance on material ESG issues demonstrate stronger stock performance than those with weak performance on the same material measures.

barriers to best practice

The absence of independent, impartial guidance as to which ratings adhere to a standard of excellence creates unnecessary friction in the ESG information supply chain.

Lack of impartial assessment of data sources, quality controls, conflicts of interest and other critical attributes of high-quality products.

Government regulation needs to mature to include ESG to mirror regulations around fixed income securities that require high credit ratings.

Measurabl empowers any company, regardless of size or type, to achieve sustainability using software to measure, manage, and act upon data. Our online software that lets you quickly and accurately file sustainability reports such as GRESB, CDP and GRI. Learn more, or get started with a free trial.